I totally disagree with the assertion that it's important to try to do great things, or at all noble to encourage others to do so. For some of us it is, for some of us it is not, and it isn't universal. I don't think it's safe to assume that it's what is is best for everyone and try to encourage them to do it. It clearly is not the best course through life for most people.

It's incredibly selfish to try to convince others to sacrifice their own happiness to make the world a better place for you and to do what you think is important. If someone is happier working at Wal-Mart, and it means they won't author the next web-based [insert MS Office product here] why try to convince them otherwise? Because you want that social network for [insert hobbyist or demographic here]?

"I totally disagree with the assertion that it's important to try to do great things (...)"

I must admit, I respect your difference of opinion, but I find it very hard to relate to your point of view. Your statement seems to be contrary to a basic aspect of the human condition; that is, the desire to improve our lots in life.

Greatness does not mean "startups for everyone". Perhaps the use of "our obligation" in my quote from Seth Godin meant "completely everyone's obligation" in your interpretation? For me, it meant the obligation of Seth's audience; that is, many of the same types with dreams of entrepreneurship who read YC news. In any case, my belief, which I believe to be the common one, is that greatness has a definition in many different situations.

Personal experience and my readings on the science of happiness (see "Flow: the Psychology of Optimal Experience" by Mihály Csíkszentmihályi) lead me to believe that the happy Wal-Mart employee is probably happy because they are able to regularly accomplish things that are meaningful to them in an environment they find suitably challenging. To say it simply, the happiness the employee finds in their work means they are likely a great Wal-Mart employee!

I think your interpretation of my statement on the nobility of encouragement alters the meaning very dramatically from the plain contextual meanings of my words. Perhaps I am not cynical enough, but to me, 'encouraging' another implies having their best interests at heart, not one's own.

For some of the readers here at YC News, we find ourselves with a startup dream inside of us that we are nearly dying to express externally. Indeed, I agree with you that those who plan to undertake a startup should take pause and not do so lightly. I believe that most of the startup bloggers you speak of at least suggest this. Encouraging people who have taken this look at the strength of their desire and their capability -- that is, freely helping this self-prepared group to reach the happiness they seek -- seems quite noble to me.

I feel I also ought to say something about the strength of your apparent disillusionment with the concept of startups. Life as a entrepreneurial success doesn't have to mean that all of one's old friends and new acquaintances turn manipulative. If it is a fear, one could simply give money beyond living allowance away to worthy causes and step back from the power game (see Woz). It's true there are relationship strengthening opportunities to be missed in starting a company, but there are also some to be gained. Co-founders may become best friends. Compatible significant others may be easier to attract when one is doing what one is passionate about.